1<!DOCTYPE html>
2
3Anonymous
4/bestp
5/bestp/domrep.nsf
6B25122E05D7711266525828600315BBC
8
9
10
11
12
13
140
15
16
17/bestp/domrep.nsf/products/strategies-for-developing-strong-field-based-medical-teams-in-cardiovascular-diabetes
18
19
203.80.60.248
21
22
23www.best-in-class.com
24/bestp/domrep.nsf
25BMR




Products & Services Medical Affairs Medical Science Liaison

Building Strong Field-Based Medical Teams to Support New Cardiovascular and Diabetes Products

ID: POP-290


Features:

6 Info Graphics

25 Data Graphics

480+ Metrics


Pages: 43


Published: 2018


Delivery Format: Shipped


 

License Options:
close

Single User: Authorizes use by the person who places the order or for whom the order was placed.

Sitewide: Authorizes use of the report for a geographic site. All people at site can view the report for a year and copies can be printed.

Corporate: Authorizes use for the entire company for a year and copies can be printed. No limitations for usage inside the company.




Buy Now

 

919-403-0251

  • STUDY OVERVIEW
  • BENCHMARK CLASS
  • STUDY SNAPSHOT
  • KEY FINDINGS
  • VIEW TOC AND LIST OF EXHIBITS
Field-based medical teams comprise a diverse set of liaisons who serve critical external customers such as physicians, payers and patients. In this task it is vital to assign and execute distinct roles and responsibilities to each of these liaison types to avoid internal conflict and improve customer engagement.

Best Practices, LLC undertook this benchmarking research to identify the strategies employed by leading biotech and pharmaceutical companies to develop effective field-based medical teams, especially in support of new treatments in the cardiovascular and diabetes therapeutic areas. This report provides powerful insights and benchmarks into the deployment of
Medical Science Liaisons (MSLs) and Health Outcomes Liaisons (HOLs), including value associated with key field-based activities, time allocation for critical activities, key performance indicators, thought leader visit frequency, staffing and training trends.

Industries Profiled:
Health Care; Pharmaceutical; Diagnostic; Manufacturing; Biotech; Consumer Products; Medical Device; Biopharmaceutical; Clinical Research; Laboratories


Companies Profiled:
Abbott; Abbvie; Bayer; Incyte; Kyowa Kirin; MSD; Novartis; Pfizer; Roche; Sanofi; UCB Pharma; ZS Pharma


Study Snapshot

Best Practices, LLC engaged 14 Medical Affairs leaders from 12 companies focused on cardiovascular and metabolic therapeutic areas. Eighty-five percent of benchmark partners are at the Senior Director level or higher.


Key topics covered in this report include:



I. Field-Based Medical Team Activities
  • Actual time spent on key activities vs. expected time allocation
  • Demonstrating value to key stakeholders
  • Key performance indicators
  • Visit frequency for building and maintaining thought leader relationships

II. Field-Based Medical Team Staffing
  • Span of control and headcount
  • Reasons behind change in headcount

III. Field-Based Medical Team Training
  • Training standardization vs customization
  • Format and frequency


Key Findings

Sample key insights uncovered from this report are noted below. Detailed findings are available in the full report.


1. Value vs. Time Spent on Activities: There are areas that MSL and HOL teams should consider spending more time on because of the associated high value.
    • HOL teams have the opportunity to increase time allocation on KOL management and congress support/attendance: While 60% of participants find these activities very valuable, HOLs spend 5hrs. / week on KOL management and 2 hrs. / week on congress support/attendance.


2.
Training Areas and Standardization:
  • Training most frequently conducted for field-based medical teams are:
    • New product and scientific training
    • Launch tactics & strategy training
  • While majority of the participants use standardized training for their field-based medical teams, they prefer to customize certain parts of their training programs. Three customized areas are: 1. Scientific information 2. Therapeutic area of focus 3. Compliance.

Table of Contents

I.Executive Summarypgs. 3-5
Participating Companiespg. 3
Key Findingspgs. 4-5
II.Actual vs. Expected Time Allocationpgs. 6-7
III.Showing the Value to Key Stakeholderspgs. 8-12
IV.Key Performance Indicatorspgs. 13-19
V.Visit Frequencypgs. 20-22
VI.Staffing: Span of Control and Headcountpgs. 23-25
VII.Reasons of Change in FBMT Headcountpgs. 26-31
VIII.Planning Field-Based Medical Team Trainingpgs. 32-37
IX.Participant Demographicspgs. 38-41
X.About Best Practices, LLCpgs. 42-43

    List of Charts & Exhibits

    I. Activities: Actual vs. Expected Time Allocation
    • Percentage difference between the actual time spent by MSLs on key activities and the expected time allocation

    II. Activities: Showing the Value to Key Stakeholders
    • Time spent by MSLs on top ten valuable activities
    • Value associated with listed MSL responsibilities
    • Time spent by HOLs on top ten valuable activities
    • Value associated with listed HOL responsibilities

    III. Activities: Key Performance Indicators
    • Comparison of usage and effectiveness of qualitative and quantitative metrics
    • Effectiveness of listed qualitative metrics in measuring the success of field-based medical teams
    • Implementation of the qualitative metrics
    • Effectiveness of listed quantitative metrics in measuring the success of field-based medical teams
    • Activities used to measure HOL and MSL performance
    • Implementation of the quantitative metrics

    IV. Activities: Visit Frequency
    • Expected frequency of MSL visits to maintain old and develop new relationships with regional and national thought leaders
    • Expected frequency of HOL visits to maintain old and build new relationships with regional and national thought leaders

    V. Staffing: Span of Control and Headcount
    • Number of FTEs in field-based medical team organization including MSL Directors, MSL Managers, MSLs, HOL Directors and HOLs

    VI. Staffing: Reasons of Change in FBMT Headcount
    • Forces behind change in field-based medical team numbers
    • Key factors likely to cause an increase in the number of MSLs
    • Important factors likely to cause an increase in the number of HOLs
    • Key factors likely to cause a decrease in the number of MSLs
    • Important factors likely to cause a decrease in the number of HOLs

    VII. Training: Planning Field-Based Medical Team Training
    • Training standardization vs customization
    • Frequency of MSL training in different areas
    • Training formats used to educate staff to increase efficiency and outreach
    • Time dedicated by field-based medical team organization on HOL training in different areas
    • Time dedicated by field-based medical team organization on MSL training in different areas